In defense of his accepting expensive trips (aka “a bribe”), which is a clear violation of the law for a person in his position, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas claims that “he was told trips didn’t need disclosure.”
In other words, a Supreme Court justice is admitting that he is ignorant of the law. Given that “ignorance of the law” is a fundamental legal principle in the U.S., why is Justice Thomas claiming that he did not know what he was doing was against the law? Maybe he was absent on the day that his law professor lectured on that point.
